On 01/01/2012 07:02 AM, Steve Teale wrote:
On Sat, 31 Dec 2011 20:28:43 -0800, bls wrote:
Not yet available. In case that Steve Teale (and he did a dammed
good Job, as well as Piotr) will add std.database this will not change
the situation significantly. 'Cause std.database will contain just
rudimentary DB support.. A Database independent, ORM based library
module is not even matter of discussion. That's a pity.
Bjoern,
Even being retired does not mean there's nothing else to do but D library
components. I didn't get back to you yet because I'm busy making
furniture for our expanding little enterprise here, and because of the
holidays, and because I need to lose a few kilos off the belly that
magically appeared while I was doing nothing but sit in front of a
keyboard.
Also I'd say for rudimentary I'd want to say basic. There's a slight
difference.
I'll be back.
Steve
But don't put the database stuff
Hi Steve,
first of all: A happy and successful new year to you!
What makes me a bit nervous is the use of structures in your source.
In case that your goal is to establish a D database access standard,
client and server wise, Interfaces are the way to go.
Well, isn't the right of the youth to be impatient :) (I am just 50)
So I am waiting for your feedback regarding the link I've send you. In
my (in this case not so humble opinion) following this Design would make
much sense.
Kind regards, Bjoern
